Police tracked the pair to a rural location, roughly 15 minutes from Foxton.
The dog handler said he saw two shadowy figures moving away from him towards the dense bush so called out, warning them to stay where they were or he would let the dog go.
The woman told the IPCA she doesn’t recall a warning before being found and bitten on her lower leg by the dog.
The officers who arrested the woman found she had serious injuries from the dog bite, and an ambulance was called to meet them at the Palmerston North Police Station. She was subsequently admitted to hospital for treatment.
The woman’s co-offender was tracked into a neighbouring paddock. He gave himself up without the need for the use of the dog.
Authority chair Judge Kenneth Johnston KC said the woman had committed no offence beyond being on a property without reasonable excuse – for which she had a valid defence.
He said other options were available to the officers – in particular, the dog should have been used to track, and then arrest, both parties.
The authority found that the use of the police dog to track the offenders was necessary but it was not reasonable for the dog to bite the woman.
“In this case, a young woman suffered life-long injuries as a result of a poor decision by the dog handler. Officers need to consider carefully whether the injury that may be caused by a dog is proportionate to the offence the person is suspected of having committed,” Kenneth said.
“Not immediately surrendering to Police does not on its own mean that an officer is justified in releasing a dog.”
The authority stated that while it accepts a dog handler’s role can be dangerous and it is understandable for them to take a “better safe than sorry” approach, the dog handler was not reasonable in assuming the worst-case scenario in that the people he was tracking may have been armed and dangerous.
Emily Moorhouse is a Christchurch-based Open Justice journalist at NZME. She joined NZME in 2022. Before that, she was at the Christchurch Star.
